Doe v. County of Kern, et al.

Filing 47

ORDER GRANTING 46 Objection to the Pretrial Order, signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston on 5/3/2017. (Hall, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JANE DOE,

12
13
14

Plaintiff,
v.
COUNTY OF KERN, et al.,
Defendants.

15

) Case No.: 1:15-cv-01637 - JLT
)
) ORDER GRANTING OBJECTION TO THE
) PRETRIAL ORDER
)
)
)
)
)

16
17

As pointed out by Mr. Navejar (Doc. 46), in the pretrial order, in the “Jurisdiction/Venue”

18

section, the Court erroneously referred to “42 U.S.C. § 1332” and indicated the Court’s jurisdiction

19

was based in diversity Not only is this an error in referencing the diversity statute, which is 28 U.S.C.

20

§ 1332, but, of course, the Court’s jurisdiction is not based upon diversity. Thus, the Court ORDERS:

21

1.

Mr. Navejar’s objection to the pretrial order is GRANTED;

22

2.

The pretrial order (Doc. 43 at I, line 21) is amended to read, “This court has subject

23

matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C § 1331.”

24
25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

May 3, 2017

/s/ Jennifer L. Thurston
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE